5 ms·

He riled many of his flock and hierarchy when he said that "even atheists can be redeemed". [0] I will always applaud a person who retreats — even just a littl

He riled many of his flock and hierarchy when he said that "even atheists can be redeemed". [0] I will always applaud a person who retreats — even just a little — from dogma and fanaticism. https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2013/05/29/187009384/Pope-Francis-Even-Atheists-Can-Be-Redeemed https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2013/05/29/187009384/...

kergonath 2y ago
> He riled many of his flock and hierarchy when he said that "even atheists can be redeemed". Which is "interesting", considering how much of the New Testament is about redemption and reaching out to outsiders. Aren’t we all supposed to be God’s creation, and wasn’t Jesus supposed to teach us about salvation, redemption and forgiveness? (And by "interesting", I mean that it is yet another of example cognitive dissonance amongst fundamentalists. If anyone can be redeemed, it implies that atheists can, as well.) > I will always applaud a person who retreats — even just a little — from dogma and fanaticism. Indeed. He was not perfect but he was better than most. I hope the next one won’t be a catholic version of patriarch Kirill.
- codr7 2y ago
  Mind explaining your issues with Kirill? Haven't really been paying attention. Wasn't he the one who got Russia into defending persecuted Christians wherever (Syria etc)?
  - kergonath 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - hylaride 2y ago
    Read up on him more. He's essentially former KGB that was originally assigned to keep an eye on the token remnants of the church in Soviet Russia. He's now saying the war against Ukraine is "holy and justified", signing up to fight is "guaranteed to wipe away your sins", etc. He's designed to manipulate a segment of the population. He's Putin's method to "religiously justify" whatever Putin wants.
    - thimkerbell 2y ago
      ("He" here is Kirill not the Pope)
    - senderista 2y ago
      The Russian Orthodox Church has been a Chekist front since Stalin revived it for nationalistic reasons during WW2. Kirill is just continuing the tradition.
  - lolinder 2y ago
    The man declared Putin's war to be a literal crusade against the West: > From a spiritual and moral point of view, the special military operation is a Holy War, in which Russia and its people, defending the single spiritual space of Holy Rus', fulfill the mission of the "Restrainer", protecting the world from the onslaught of globalism and the victory of the West that has fallen into Satanism. > After the end of the SVO, the entire territory of modern Ukraine must enter the zone of exclusive influence of Russia. The possibility of the existence on this territory of a Russophobic political regime hostile to Russia and its people, as well as a political regime controlled from an external center hostile to Russia, must be completely excluded. https://www-patriarchia-ru.translate.goog/db/text/6116189.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-patriarchia-ru.translate.goog/db/text/6116189.ht...
    - giraffe_lady 2y ago
      He also said that russian men who die fighting in ukraine are guaranteed salvation. In orthodox theology this sort of thing has historically been recognized as a straightforward heresy. We do not claim to know in advance who will be saved, or by what specific acts. Not even bishops or metropolitans. So even from a strictly orthodox perspective he is dangerously divisive and has broken from one of our most important traditions. (The recognition of saints is a little different, happening always after their death and depending on some degree of regional consensus. It's sloppy but whatever, it is actually not as similar as it might look.)
- hylaride 2y ago
  > Which is "interesting", considering how much of the New Testament is about redemption and reaching out to outsiders. Aren’t we all supposed to be God’s creation, and wasn’t Jesus supposed to teach us about salvation, redemption and forgiveness? As religion has shrunk in participation in most of the west, it has become hugely susceptible to manipulation. My wife (now atheist, but grew up evangelical) often has to correct me when I make snide remarks about Christianity. Recently I made some comment about hypocrisy amongst Christians for supporting a multiply-divorced man who bragged about groping women for president (who has probably never read the bible), to say nothing of the people around him. She quickly snapped back at me that "they actually see themselves in him, have you not noticed all the sex scandals that happen in so many churches?" and then went on to list the "questionable" relationships in her own youth group. (I am NOT saying all Christians are like this, but religion is often used to cover up or excuse misdeeds). It is not unique to Christianity or even Islam, though. You're seeing a lot of religion being used to justify many terrible things, including many smaller ones in Africa and Asia that have been used to justify atrocities and genocide.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    I guess it's good to correct an incorrect accusation of hypocrisy. But it's not great when doing so takes the form, "People aren't being hypocrites in not condemning someone in power for the bad things he does, because they do those bad things too".
  - kergonath 2y ago
    > She quickly snapped back at me that "they actually see themselves in him, have you not noticed all the sex scandals that happen in so many churches?" I think she is right for some of these people. It is a human reaction, but it is still a moral failing. The proper Christian (well, Catholic, anyway) thing to do would be what is expected in a confession: recognise one’s failings, express regret, and accept consequences, including punishment. Then comes redemption. Something that irks me fundamentally with most Christian religions is how they believe that they are Good People because they accepted God and rejected Evil. It’s all good as long as you play the part. Once you start looking for excuses, you failed twice: first, because of your behaviour, and then for failing to repent. If you support someone because he made the same error you did, then you fail yet again. This behaviour is understandable, but trippy incorrect from a religious perspective and very hypocritical. In the grand scheme of things, it is very easy to get forgiveness, you just have to be sincere in your regrets (again, for Catholics, which is what I know).
- sramsay 2y ago
  It's funny you mention Kiril. I keep thinking about Pope Francis's (apparently deep and genuine) friendship with Bartholomew, Ecumenical Patriarch of the Orthodox Church. It is traditional for the EP to visit Rome on the patronal Feast of Saints Peter and Paul and for the Pope to visit Istanbul on the Feast of Saint Andrew, which is apparently when the friendship first formed. My absolute favorite story about Francis is his deciding to send some of the most precious relics in the Vatican to Bartholomew as a gift: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-09/pope-francis-patriarch-bartholomew-bones-peter.html https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-09/pope-francis... (That sent some people into a fury). Actually, it's my second favorite story. My favorite story is his insistence that he live in the Vatican guesthouse (and not the Papal apartments). Or perhaps the fact that as archbishop of Buenos Ares he insisted on taking the subway.
  - lukan 2y ago
    "Actually, it's my second favorite story. My favorite story is his insistence that he live in the Vatican guesthouse" I believe that had mainly power reasons, because pope Paul II was pretty out of the loop, what the cardinals were doing. And Francis likely expected to face opposition in what he was doing, so being closer to the "people" was likely helpful on having an eye on them.
dctoedt 2y ago
> He riled many of his flock and hierarchy when he said that "even atheists can be redeemed". It's quite a bit above our pay grade to proclaim categorically who supposedly cannot be redeemed; it verges on blasphemy. Cf. Job. 38: 1. Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm. He said: 2 “Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge? 3 "Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me. 4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. 5 "Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? 6 "On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone— 7 "while the morning stars sang together and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?" (etc.) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Job%2038&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Job%2038&versio...
- heresie-dabord 2y ago
  > It's quite a bit above our pay grade [...] it verges on blasphemy. Cheers! As I understand the term blasphemy, our presumptuous species has a great deal to assert about the unknowable. ^_^
- schmookeeg 2y ago
  As an agnostic who spends a lot of time reading scriptures of several religions, trying to grasp the themes and motivations of others I share a world with -- those passages are particularly inscrutable.
  - dctoedt 2y ago
    > As an agnostic who spends a lot of time reading scriptures of several religions, trying to grasp the themes and motivations of others I share a world with -- those passages are particularly inscrutable. I think the author's intent is to remind us that some things are simply beyond our ken (to which I'd add: For now).
  - QuarterReptile 2y ago
    It's repeating, over and over, the extreme ignorance, and thus presumption, of Job in running from what God told him to do. Edited to add: this is a single passage with verse markings.
AlgorithmicTime 2y ago
[dead]

kergonath 2y ago

> He riled many of his flock and hierarchy when he said that "even atheists can be redeemed". Which is "interesting", considering how much of the New Testament is about redemption and reaching out to outsiders. Aren’t we all supposed to be God’s creation, and wasn’t Jesus supposed to teach us about salvation, redemption and forgiveness? (And by "interesting", I mean that it is yet another of example cognitive dissonance amongst fundamentalists. If anyone can be redeemed, it implies that atheists can, as well.) > I will always applaud a person who retreats — even just a little — from dogma and fanaticism. Indeed. He was not perfect but he was better than most. I hope the next one won’t be a catholic version of patriarch Kirill.

codr7 2y ago
Mind explaining your issues with Kirill? Haven't really been paying attention. Wasn't he the one who got Russia into defending persecuted Christians wherever (Syria etc)?
- kergonath 2y ago
  [flagged]
- hylaride 2y ago
  Read up on him more. He's essentially former KGB that was originally assigned to keep an eye on the token remnants of the church in Soviet Russia. He's now saying the war against Ukraine is "holy and justified", signing up to fight is "guaranteed to wipe away your sins", etc. He's designed to manipulate a segment of the population. He's Putin's method to "religiously justify" whatever Putin wants.
  - thimkerbell 2y ago
    ("He" here is Kirill not the Pope)
  - senderista 2y ago
    The Russian Orthodox Church has been a Chekist front since Stalin revived it for nationalistic reasons during WW2. Kirill is just continuing the tradition.
- lolinder 2y ago
  The man declared Putin's war to be a literal crusade against the West: > From a spiritual and moral point of view, the special military operation is a Holy War, in which Russia and its people, defending the single spiritual space of Holy Rus', fulfill the mission of the "Restrainer", protecting the world from the onslaught of globalism and the victory of the West that has fallen into Satanism. > After the end of the SVO, the entire territory of modern Ukraine must enter the zone of exclusive influence of Russia. The possibility of the existence on this territory of a Russophobic political regime hostile to Russia and its people, as well as a political regime controlled from an external center hostile to Russia, must be completely excluded. https://www-patriarchia-ru.translate.goog/db/text/6116189.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-patriarchia-ru.translate.goog/db/text/6116189.ht...
  - giraffe_lady 2y ago
    He also said that russian men who die fighting in ukraine are guaranteed salvation. In orthodox theology this sort of thing has historically been recognized as a straightforward heresy. We do not claim to know in advance who will be saved, or by what specific acts. Not even bishops or metropolitans. So even from a strictly orthodox perspective he is dangerously divisive and has broken from one of our most important traditions. (The recognition of saints is a little different, happening always after their death and depending on some degree of regional consensus. It's sloppy but whatever, it is actually not as similar as it might look.)
hylaride 2y ago
> Which is "interesting", considering how much of the New Testament is about redemption and reaching out to outsiders. Aren’t we all supposed to be God’s creation, and wasn’t Jesus supposed to teach us about salvation, redemption and forgiveness? As religion has shrunk in participation in most of the west, it has become hugely susceptible to manipulation. My wife (now atheist, but grew up evangelical) often has to correct me when I make snide remarks about Christianity. Recently I made some comment about hypocrisy amongst Christians for supporting a multiply-divorced man who bragged about groping women for president (who has probably never read the bible), to say nothing of the people around him. She quickly snapped back at me that "they actually see themselves in him, have you not noticed all the sex scandals that happen in so many churches?" and then went on to list the "questionable" relationships in her own youth group. (I am NOT saying all Christians are like this, but religion is often used to cover up or excuse misdeeds). It is not unique to Christianity or even Islam, though. You're seeing a lot of religion being used to justify many terrible things, including many smaller ones in Africa and Asia that have been used to justify atrocities and genocide.
- kelnos 2y ago
  I guess it's good to correct an incorrect accusation of hypocrisy. But it's not great when doing so takes the form, "People aren't being hypocrites in not condemning someone in power for the bad things he does, because they do those bad things too".
- kergonath 2y ago
  > She quickly snapped back at me that "they actually see themselves in him, have you not noticed all the sex scandals that happen in so many churches?" I think she is right for some of these people. It is a human reaction, but it is still a moral failing. The proper Christian (well, Catholic, anyway) thing to do would be what is expected in a confession: recognise one’s failings, express regret, and accept consequences, including punishment. Then comes redemption. Something that irks me fundamentally with most Christian religions is how they believe that they are Good People because they accepted God and rejected Evil. It’s all good as long as you play the part. Once you start looking for excuses, you failed twice: first, because of your behaviour, and then for failing to repent. If you support someone because he made the same error you did, then you fail yet again. This behaviour is understandable, but trippy incorrect from a religious perspective and very hypocritical. In the grand scheme of things, it is very easy to get forgiveness, you just have to be sincere in your regrets (again, for Catholics, which is what I know).
sramsay 2y ago
It's funny you mention Kiril. I keep thinking about Pope Francis's (apparently deep and genuine) friendship with Bartholomew, Ecumenical Patriarch of the Orthodox Church. It is traditional for the EP to visit Rome on the patronal Feast of Saints Peter and Paul and for the Pope to visit Istanbul on the Feast of Saint Andrew, which is apparently when the friendship first formed. My absolute favorite story about Francis is his deciding to send some of the most precious relics in the Vatican to Bartholomew as a gift: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-09/pope-francis-patriarch-bartholomew-bones-peter.html https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-09/pope-francis... (That sent some people into a fury). Actually, it's my second favorite story. My favorite story is his insistence that he live in the Vatican guesthouse (and not the Papal apartments). Or perhaps the fact that as archbishop of Buenos Ares he insisted on taking the subway.
- lukan 2y ago
  "Actually, it's my second favorite story. My favorite story is his insistence that he live in the Vatican guesthouse" I believe that had mainly power reasons, because pope Paul II was pretty out of the loop, what the cardinals were doing. And Francis likely expected to face opposition in what he was doing, so being closer to the "people" was likely helpful on having an eye on them.

dctoedt 2y ago

> He riled many of his flock and hierarchy when he said that "even atheists can be redeemed". It's quite a bit above our pay grade to proclaim categorically who supposedly cannot be redeemed; it verges on blasphemy. Cf. Job. 38: 1. Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm. He said: 2 “Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge? 3 "Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me. 4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. 5 "Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? 6 "On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone— 7 "while the morning stars sang together and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?" (etc.) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Job%2038&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Job%2038&versio...

heresie-dabord 2y ago
> It's quite a bit above our pay grade [...] it verges on blasphemy. Cheers! As I understand the term blasphemy, our presumptuous species has a great deal to assert about the unknowable. ^_^
schmookeeg 2y ago
As an agnostic who spends a lot of time reading scriptures of several religions, trying to grasp the themes and motivations of others I share a world with -- those passages are particularly inscrutable.
- dctoedt 2y ago
  > As an agnostic who spends a lot of time reading scriptures of several religions, trying to grasp the themes and motivations of others I share a world with -- those passages are particularly inscrutable. I think the author's intent is to remind us that some things are simply beyond our ken (to which I'd add: For now).
- QuarterReptile 2y ago
  It's repeating, over and over, the extreme ignorance, and thus presumption, of Job in running from what God told him to do. Edited to add: this is a single passage with verse markings.

AlgorithmicTime 2y ago

[dead]